re: Y’all smell the panic?

I think the Texas case brought on behalf of the state itself could be revisited in some way, and if it is I don’t know about on the hook for damages to the states themselves. However the fraud states may be on the hook for one gigantic arse 1983 action by their own citizens who they disenfranchised, not to mention the citizens of the states in the Texas action.

Along with some penalties and atty fees.

Tell me what is going to change? I hope to God Xiden and co. Could each be arrested for treason and a laundry list of other crimes. Clearly, they do not have the best interest of this country.

I just don’t see it ever being “called back”.

Hang on for 2022. That’s our year.

quote:

---

If we go the coup route, almost certainly we'd see charges of treason tossed around, and it certainly should be at least considered. I mean, we'd be talking about the deliberate deposing of the rightful President of the US; you can't get much higher on the list.

---

Treason is specifically defined in the Constitution:

quote:

---

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

---

I am not sure that this current situation fits the specific definition. In and of itself (without the proven direct involvement of a hostile foreign government) election fraud is not an act of war against the United States. Its a separate federal crime.

Skipped pages to get here but... what is the relief asked for in the complaint? Compare that with the sanction ability of the court. I imagine the court could rule the election vitiated by fraud although I doubt a court would go that far.

To be honest, if AZ is shown to be wrong and GA is shown to be wrong, both in favor of biden there could be some repercussions that should scare democrats

quote:

---

How so - IF the conclusion is that Biden should be removed, how does that elevate Harris??

Were they not on the same slot in the ballot?? could you vote for one and not the other?? is there any way of claiming that Biden's election should be negated but not Harris'?

I'm not sure there is a way to declare the election void, but if there is, it should make Harris susceptible to the same conclusion and anything that Biden did (Exec Orders, cabinet selections, et al) should also be come void.

---

I mentioned in the post you quoted that the next person in line would likely be Pelosi, and not Harris for this exact reason. If the evidence causes the Democrats to remove Biden, Harris will be going too in all likelihood—unless she could show them/the public that she was unaware or uninvolved.

quote:

---

ONLY sensible conclusion should be to reinstate the LAST duly elected executives as pro-tem officials and declare a new election immediately - also, all initiatives and orders and sign-offs should be immediately voided and all authority under them removed.

---

I get what you’re saying, and why...but that’s just not how it’s set up. Even IF all inaugurations, etc were “voided”...Trump’s term ended at 11:59:59 on January 20,2021. He has no claim to the Presidency after that time and cannot be re-inaugurated to take the office. It’s also not possible to hold a special election for President without amending the Constitution.

I know everyone here is tired of hearing all of that and it’s not what anyone wants to hear...but everyone invested in these developments regarding the election’s integrity need to have a realistic outlook at what happens next. There are no facts that lead to Donald Trump being inaugurated without his winning the 2024 POTUS election. That’s off the table.

quote:

---

I imagine the court could rule the election vitiated by fraud although I doubt a court would go that far.

---

They “could”, but it would be pointless and overturned on appeal. The judiciary (state or federal, including SCOTUS) doesn’t have the power to overturn or change the result of federal elections, or the power to remove members of Congress or officers of the Executive.

quote:

---

I mentioned in the post you quoted that the next person in line would likely be Pelosi, and not Harris for this exact reason. If the evidence causes the Democrats to remove Biden, Harris will be going too in all likelihood—unless she could show them/the public that she was unaware or uninvolved.

---

You might be correct about all of that, but it seems 'effed up.

It's like a NASCAR race in which the driver gets disqualified for cheating, but instead of the 2nd place car being named the winner, either the cheating driver's pit crew wins or they randomly give the trophy to some fan in the 3rd row who wasn't even competing.

The 2020 election is over and democrats will have the White House until January 2025.

It's that simple. Get over it.

The loss of faith in the MSM by the general public should put the final nail in their credibility. That is a game-
changer.

Now, combine that with the stories that CVD-19 might have come from the lab in CHYNA after all.


After that, it is the states cleaning their damn voter rolls as Florida and Ohio did.

quote:

---

the next person in line would likely be Pelosi, and not Harris for this exact reason.

---

And this is the position we should have been faced with on Jan 20th, should Pence had fulfilled his constitutional duty and refused to certify fraudulent (and at the very least - suspicious) state EC results on Jan 6.

We would have been at exactly the same place, only the order would have been for all states to audit their results with the intent of inaugurating the winner of the 2020 election on Mar 4.

Instead, the lawful challenge process was derailed by ANTIFA agitators who embedded themselves in the patriot crowd the day of the EC challenges.

Precisely, which is why I said to someone earlier that unprecedented fraud requires unprecedented remedies.

As it stands, we don't know what we don't know, factually, but it sure does look like those of us who were concerned with henhouse security gigs being filled by foxes were over the target.